| 1 |
On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 20:20:53 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Yes. AFAIK, there's another 64-bit flash beta out. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> But meanwhile, there's a problem with beta glibc and flash (both 32-bit |
| 8 |
> and 64-bit), |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
What boggles my mind is that after so many, many years this 32-bit |
| 11 |
to 64-bit transition is still not complete. The developers |
| 12 |
of Flash, as highly paid ($$$) as they doubtless are, are quite |
| 13 |
unable to modify their code to perform on modern hardware. |
| 14 |
I recall that Sun java took a heck of a long time to go to 64-bit, |
| 15 |
and unless I am mistaken there still is no 64-bit java plug-in. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
It should not be that difficult. In the C programming language, |
| 18 |
only the size of pointers and certain integer types has been |
| 19 |
changed. Modification of software is straightforward and there |
| 20 |
are even automated tools to assist in the job. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Flash probably has a lot of assembly language routines (I am |
| 23 |
not at all privy to the code) but the original designers should |
| 24 |
still be able to modify it with ease. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Unless I am missing some crucial information, this whole 32 to 64-bit |
| 27 |
fiasco should have ended years ago. We managed to build an atomic |
| 28 |
bomb (Manhattan Project) from scratch in less than 3 years, but |
| 29 |
a 64-bit Flash (as well as other software) probably won't be finalized |
| 30 |
before an entire decade has elapsed. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I really couldn't care less about Flash, but I would like to have |
| 33 |
a 64-bit Foxit PDF reader. Xpdf is a fine project, but it can't |
| 34 |
fill in forms or annotate a document. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Frank Peters |
Archives